Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Need a little usability?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Need a little usability?

2,042

Published on

Presentation on what you can learn from usability testing and projects in ballot and elections. Dana Chisnell and Whitney Quesenbery at EVN 2012

Presentation on what you can learn from usability testing and projects in ballot and elections. Dana Chisnell and Whitney Quesenbery at EVN 2012

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
6 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,042
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
6
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • On April 4th, 2005, citizens with disabilities from all over the state tested voting systems and completed surveys documenting their reactions to each system. A total of 496 surveys were completed.The survey results on the following page will be one of several factors used to help the Oregon Secretary of State decide which voting system or systems to purchase to give citizens with disabilities the opportunity to vote privately and independently. Survey was a modified SUS – 12 questionsI would like to use this voting system in an election. There were too many steps in using this voting system.I thought this voting system was easy to use. The instructions for this voting system were difficult to understand. The buttons or touch screen were easy to use. It was hard to move around the ballot with this system. I think that most people could learn to use this voting system very quickly.I found this voting system awkward or difficult to use. I felt very confident that my vote was cast correctly with this voting system. I would need help each time I used this voting system. The ballot text was easy to read or hear. Casting my vote was easy.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Need a little usability?What you can learn from usability testingWhitney QuesenberyDana ChisnellUsability in Civic Life
    • 2. 2What questions do you have?
    • 3. 3Usability testing answers questions, so we have tounderstand the question we are askingIf we want to know: Which ballot design helps voters be more accurate?We are asking a question that is Comparative, quantitative (errors, time) (and why they made those mistakes)If we want to know: Do voters understand how to mark their ballot?We are asking a question that is abut Mental models, variability, qualitative insights (and how prevalent each model is)
    • 4. 4Helpful models for thinking about usabilityA’s Ability, aptitude, attitude (what voters bring to the election)E’s Efficient, effective, engaging, error-tolerant, easy to learn (dimensions of usability)Use Useful, usable (operable), desirable (how we define success)
    • 5. 5The recipe for planning a usability testLocation and context: formal informalRecruiting: defined opportunisticActivities: instructed tasks free tasksQuestions: structured unstructuredData collection: observation task/data onlyResults quantitative qualitative
    • 6. 6A few examples
    • 7. 7Which instructions work better?Traditional ballot instructions vs. plain language version About this project  45 participants  3 lab setting, 8 days  2 moderators  Instructions for voting  Careful observation  Satisfaction survey We learned about  Voter accuracy  Order effects  Voter preference Results  Statistical analysis  Participant preference
    • 8. 8Which layout works better?Left aligned vs. right aligned names? About this project  100 participants  2 locations, 1 day  4 moderators + 6 others  Instructions for voting  Minimal observation We learned about  Voter preference  Time to vote  Number of errors Results  Statistical analysis of marked ballots
    • 9. 9What do voters do with unusual options?How do voters react to “double-vote” options? About this project  200 participants  5 locations, 1 day  12 moderators + 5 others  Self-defined tasks  Minimal observation We learned about  Voter awareness of party  Types of marks and errors  Need for voter ed. Results  Inspection of ballots for marking patterns
    • 10. 10What problems might voters have with a new ballot?What problems might voters have with a new ballot design? About this project  1 of 5 similar tests  10 participants  1 locations, 1 day  2 moderators + 1 others  Self-defined tasks  Observation  Post-task questionnaire We learned about  Navigation on the ballot  Instructions Results  Found pattern of errors for one interaction  Time on task
    • 11. 11What do voters think about different systems?Which accessible voting system do voters prefer? About this project  496 surveys; multi-disabilit  11 systems  Multiday “voting fair” They learned about  Voter assessment of usability  Voter comments about accessibility  Differences by disability Results  Statistical analysis survey results  Qualitative analysis of comments
    • 12. 12Do voters understand how their votes are counted?Can voters explain and act on that understanding? About this project  20 participants  4 locations, 1 day  8 moderators  Self-defined tasks  Minimal observation We learned about  Navigation on the ballot  Instructions  Mental models of counting  Whether there’s a problem Results  Qualitative insights
    • 13. 13Do voters understand a new voting system?What is their reaction to new procedures? About this project  Focus group  Mock election  1 moderators They learned about  Attitudes and reactions Results  Qualitative insights
    • 14. 14Things to watch out for whenplanning a usability test
    • 15. 15Treating participants with respectLanguage and cultural issuesManaging contextParticipant protections and informed consent
    • 16. 16Avoiding biasLeading questionsClosed vs. open questionsSampling biasModerator influenceObserver (or moderator reactions)
    • 17. 17Thoughts?
    • 18. 18Whitney Quesenberywhitney@wqusability.comDana Chisnelldana@usabilityworks.netField guides to ensuring voter intenthttp://tinyurl.com/ensuringvoterintentUsability in Civic Lifehttp://usabilityinciviclife.orgCivic Designhttp://civicdesigning.orgLEO Usability Testing Kithttp://www.usabilityinciviclife.org/voting/leo-testing-kit/

    ×